Alternative Procurement Business Case

[Guest monkeyx]

Our school is starting an Alternative Procurement Business Case to opt out of centrally managed BSF funding for ICT and FM.

 

I am looking for other schools that are going to be attempting something similar or have tried something similar too see if we can pool ideas and experience.

 

Thanks,

 

Tim

[GoldenWonder]

The documents I've read from our LEA mention (almost proudly) that no school has sucessfully managed to provide a viable business case.

 

Anyone know if thats actually true?

[GrumbleDook]

It is true, no school has been successful.

 

Some have been put off it by their LA, some have not been able to get the paperwork together, those who have and have gone all the way have been unsuccessful, with one school choosing to pull out of the managed service and forego the IT investment (whilst still staying in the building side of things).

 

Paul Haigh has a good blog about the experiences he had when putting the application forward, and how they have had to manage things after being unsuccessful.

 

Although I have not seen any of the reports about why they have not been successful there are a few things that I heard 3rd hand which have been raised including financial viability, TCO, sustainability and segregation from LA.

 

Keep plugging and let us all know how it goes.

 

Best of luck with it.

[Guest monkeyx]

Thanks for the updates.

 

I am in contact with Paul.

 

I am not really hoping for luck, as luck will not cut it

 

I am hoping that it will be easier to make a case against an incumbent wave 1 BSF provider though, rather than some mythical contract that has yet to be delievered

 

Tim

[e_g_r]

We are looking at trying to opt out on the basis that the managed service dosn't offer best value over our existing systems.

 

Can anyone shed some light on the following queries;

 

If legacy kit isn't transfered who pays for replacement? The managed service or does it come out of the pot of money being offered to schools in an LEA?

 

If for what ever political or economic reason your school is not re built or refurbed but you are signed upto the managed service - who would pay to bring your existing network infrastructure upto date. i.e. replacing cat5 + cat5e with cat6 - managed servie or school money

 

If you were succesfull in not buying into the managed service how would the school get on with integrated MIS and other stuff?

 

How do the managed service calculate staffing levels? If they have one on site techie how do they deal with instant multiple teaching and learning problems.

 

Any solid advice is most welcome.

[e_g_r]

It is true, no school has been successful.

 

Some have been put off it by their LA, some have not been able to get the paperwork together, those who have and have gone all the way have been unsuccessful, with one school choosing to pull out of the managed service and forego the IT investment (whilst still staying in the building side of things).

 

Paul Haigh has a good blog about the experiences he had when putting the application forward, and how they have had to manage things after being unsuccessful.

 

Although I have not seen any of the reports about why they have not been successful there are a few things that I heard 3rd hand which have been raised including financial viability, TCO, sustainability and segregation from LA.

 

Keep plugging and let us all know how it goes.

 

Best of luck with it.

 

link?

 

tried google but didn't find anything

[NewOrder]

We are looking at trying to opt out on the basis that the managed service dosn't offer best value over our existing systems.

 

Can anyone shed some light on the following queries;

 

If legacy kit isn't transfered who pays for replacement? The managed service or does it come out of the pot of money being offered to schools in an LEA?

 

If for what ever political or economic reason your school is not re built or refurbed but you are signed upto the managed service - who would pay to bring your existing network infrastructure upto date. i.e. replacing cat5 + cat5e with cat6 - managed servie or school money

 

If you were succesfull in not buying into the managed service how would the school get on with integrated MIS and other stuff?

 

How do the managed service calculate staffing levels? If they have one on site techie how do they deal with instant multiple teaching and learning problems.

 

Any solid advice is most welcome.

 

Even multiple sponsor academies that run in excess of 5 schools have difficulty with the opt out. Often difficult for VFM and 14-19

 

Legacy equipment should be considered. It helps with sustainability and future costs. It should not be merely replaced. I would have concerns over this as it would indicate MSP interested in selling as much tin as possible. This leaves less money for transformation.

 

If you are not having a rebuild or refurb you are not in BSF. So no need for managed service.

 

The managed service should not be a one size fits all, it should be tailored. So if you are a school with good ICT, equipment, use, admin use, innovation and transformation then what you are offered should uplift you even further. If it does not then you can ask serious questions.

 

MIS think SIF.

 

One of the major issues with BSF is consultation and communication. Those that need to know tend to be missed out.

 

You would be surprised at the number of schools that do not attend meetings or when they do it never gets communicated at school level.

[e_g_r]

"If you are not having a rebuild or refurb you are not in BSF. So no need for managed service."

 

Thats the key, they make you sign up for the service with no guarante that you will get a new build or refurb if it all changes (gov/economy) were phase 3 of the build so if the Torys pull the plug we could end up with same old school but managed service.

 

If this is the case who pays for the cable upgrade?

[e_g_r]

Our school is starting an Alternative Procurement Business Case to opt out of centrally managed BSF funding for ICT and FM.

 

I am looking for other schools that are going to be attempting something similar or have tried something similar too see if we can pool ideas and experience.

 

Thanks,

 

Tim

 

i presume that you've seen/got these documents but if not here is a link

 

BSF ICT opt-out - WhatDoTheyKnow

[e_g_r]

Also link to failed school with usefull documents

 

http://www.villiers.ealing.sch.uk/apbc/

[Guest monkeyx]

Yes thanks for those links, may be of use to others. I had found them on here before.

 

I have downloaded all the files for reference for our own bid.

 

Tim

[Sylv3r]

link?

 

tried google but didn't find anything

 

It used to be public, but now invite only by the looks of it.

 

http://haighysblog.blogspot.com/

[e_g_r]

Thanks, managed to find it and it is invite only.

 

Head is now doing a u turn on this, can't blame him realy as the LEA are putting presure on him to sign up.

 

Looks very difficult to do a APCD and get it through. The only other option would be to pull out altogether and miss out on the money.

[russdev]

Key here is the APBC is not about winning it but to use to give some leverage when you are part of BSF.

 

Russ

[Face-Man]

If it's leverage you require make sure you are involved as early as possible in the discussions. It is a lot easier to change the solution from the beginning rather than after the solution is imposed. If they try and fop you off don't take no for an answer and if you have to just turn up it worked for me.

[russdev]

@Face-man

 

I agree but lets but it like this lets say you have school A who goes along with talking about being part of BSF but at same time prepares a APBC lets be honest would not take much for LA to make sure they are the trial/pioneer school in return for being part of BSF.

 

Russ

[Guest monkeyx]

As a trust school, we are wanting to chose what is the best for our school. Not what the LA thinks is best for our school as integral part of the BSF process. We have decided to do many things well before BSF that were not part of the LA strategy.

 

But I would prefer this thread to stick to talking about examples of schools putting in and preparing APBCs, rather than using them as a bargaining tool. Some schools have refused funding rather than accept the imposed strategy! We are not starting our APBC on the premiss that it will be a bartering tool!

 

Ideally I am looking for schools that are not part of the initial BSF waves that are looking at APBCs.

 

Tim

[russdev]

Of course Tim sorry for taking your thread slightly off topic. I of course wasn't saying that is what why you where starting it.

 

Russ

[putt1ck]

But this thread and others seems to indicate that no one has been allowed (and there is no right of appeal) to opt out of the BSF; this is regardless of how well they have managed ICT in the past, regardless of whether solutions they are currently using are available under the local BSF managed service; or where theoretically available it is demonstrable the provider has little or no skills supporting solutions.

 

I've read the decision for Villiers; while the points made are no doubt valid, I am certain I could raise similar level criticisms for most BSF solutions. After all, this is all in my professional area, and one person's solution/strategy is easily criticised from a different perspective.

 

Where's the choice? What opportunities are there for schools to innovate with ICT inside a BSF deal? If no one can get an Alternative Procurement Business Case through, is it because the BSF system assumes one size fits all is better by default?

 

(yes, I know it's a little OT; happy to be redirected to a new thread if more suitable)

 

Cheers

 

Chris

[broc]

The decision to impose a managed ICT solution on schools and LAs as part of BSF is political, in the same way as forcing LAs to close perfectly good schools & replace them with academies in order to secure BSF funding is political. It is not about reducing cost & saving money.

 

BSF is being driven by the need to renew crumbling school infrastructure (after decades of neglect by both Labour and Conservatives). There is no money in the Government coffers, the Government needs PFI, and managed ICT is a sweetener for the PFI companies.